Arpaio and Thomas file suit alleging conspiracy

Pair say other officials in county obstructing them

Alleging widespread conspiracy, Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio filed a civil suit in U.S. District Court on Tuesday against county administrators, elected officials, judges and attorneys. Those defendants, they say, are violating federal racketeering laws by hindering criminal investigations and depriving their offices of resources.

County officials dismissed the claim as frivolous, saying Arpaio and Thomas have routinely lost on similar claims in state and local courts.

In the lawsuit, Thomas and Arpaio name all five members of the Board of Supervisors along with County Manager David Smith, Deputy County Manager Sandi Wilson, four Maricopa County Superior Court judges, director of the county's civil-litigation division, two attorneys and a law firm.

Thomas and Arpaio, who have been allies in an increasingly vicious battle with the county, said at a joint news conference Tuesday that they filed the suit to be granted "equitable relief so that we can do our jobs." They were referring to their dissatisfaction with the county's new civil-litigation department, which supersedes part of Thomas' duties.

They are asking for unspecified monetary damages and attorney fees.

Thomas did not explain why he did not pursue charges in criminal court. But of late, he has been stymied by court rulings in his criminal investigations of county officials. The burden of proof is less in civil court. And filing in federal court potentially sidesteps accusations of conflict of interest that have plagued his office.

Cari Gerchick, a spokeswoman with the county's civil-litigation unit, accused him of "practicing law by press conference." She said none of the parties at the county had yet been served with the suit.

In a statement, the supervisors called the move a "sore losers lawsuit" and waste of public resources.

Smith said, "The sheriff and the county attorney have filed a number of lawsuits over a range of issues, and they've lost every time, and then they ascribe these losses to a vast conspiracy."

Among other things, the claim alleges:

• Judges conspired with other defendants to funnel money into the court-tower project under construction in downtown Phoenix and to Tom Irvine and Ed Novak, attorneys representing the county. For example, the suit notes that the Superior Court hired Irvine without going through normal procurement policies.

• County administrators conspired with judges and other defendants to hinder criminal investigations of Supervisor Don Stapley. The suit claims the court bypassed the random assignment of a judge and instead assigned a judge who was biased against Thomas. Among other things, the suit alleges Presiding Criminal Court Judge Gary Donahoe improperly removed Thomas' office from prosecuting county officials.

• County administrators conspired to deprive Arpaio of his right to legal representation from the County Attorney's Office when the county created a civil-litigation division, taking $6 million and staff members from Thomas' office to do so. A Superior Court judge approved the move, which essentially gutted Thomas' civil-litigation section.

• County administrators misused taxpayer funds, spending $10,000to sweep for listening devices in county offices after Stapley's arrest. Smith said the sweep was for illegally placed bugs; none was found.

Arpaio characterized county government as a "good ole boys network."

"I've never seen these kinds of things occur in the justice system," he said.

The lawsuit comes on the heels of the supervisors' refusing to approve contracts for a pair of high-profile attorneys from Washington, D.C., to conduct a second investigation into Stapley.

Stapley was indicted in November 2008 on 118 counts alleging omissions and misstatements on his financial-disclosure forms during a 14-year period. But retired Judge Kenneth Fields dismissed the misdemeanor counts against Stapley in August, and prosecutors dismissed the remaining charges in September. Days later, the Sheriff's Office revealed a new probe into Stapley's suspected misuse of campaign funds. The county said it had authority over the special prosecutors selected to investigate the allegations.

During the news conference Tuesday, Thomas characterized the actions of county administrators as "a solid year's worth of intimidation." He refused to say whether the suit was filed to counter his stymied attempts to press criminal charges against Stapley and others. Those efforts have been hampered not only by county actions, but by Thomas' strained relationships with other prosecutorial offices, such as the Attorney General's Office.

The suit, in essence, reiterates all of Thomas' battles with the courts and county since 2006, including accusations of conspiracy by Judges Barbara Mundell, Anna Baca, Donahoe and Fields, claiming that the dispute began with the court's opposition to Thomas' immigration policies. It revisits the questions Thomas raised about the new $341 million court tower. Donahoe removed Thomas' office from that investigation, and the Arizona Court of Appeals upheld Donahoe's decision. Coincidentally, on Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court refused to reconsider that case.

Superior Court spokeswoman Jessica Funkhouser declined comment.

The racketeering case will be assigned to a federal judge, who will set a schedule for fact-finding and legal responses.